I wonder if Vlad could shed some light on the gun running out of Benghazi? I am pretty sure the Russians knew what was going on there.
The Russian leader is making sense
while the Mental Case in the WH is talking gibberish.
IDIOCRACY.....is how HISTORY will write these Obama years, there are plenty of sources for proof.
It’s tough to listen to Putin. I’m still not used to believing the Russian leader more than the American president. Crazy damn times we’re in.
He’s correct but Russia has done the same.
"If we want to actually dismantle ISIS, we need to dramatically change course. We need a real, robust campaign that maximizes our overwhelming air advantage.
We need to focus our efforts not on trying to create friends, but on supporting our real ones, especially the Kurds in Iraq and Syria who have actually had success against ISIS."
-snip-
"We can redouble our efforts to develop the defensive weapons that neutralized the offensive Soviet threat -- particularly missile defense, which has seen a 25% budget reduction under Obama, according to an analysis from the conservative Heritage Foundation, and has been constrained by bad arms deals like New START.
We should not only move quickly to install the canceled interceptor sites Putin opposed in Poland and the Czech Republic, but also to develop the next generation of systems that will only increase his discomfiture.
These options do not entail a ground war in Syria, yet would effectively shake us free from the failed policies that have brought us to our current impasse.
These options set us on a new path that puts Putin on notice that the United States is reclaiming our traditional role as leader of the free world."
http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/09/opinions/cruz-syria-putin/index.html
************************************************************
“I think it would be a mistake to get involved in the Syrian civil war. There have been voices in Washington eager for us to send our sons and daughters over to fight that civil war for some time. I haven’t been one of them. I think the touchstone of U.S. military policy should be protecting the national security of this country.
“What we’re seeing Putin in Russia do is a direct response to the profound weakness of Obama over six and a half years.
Putin views Obama as weak, as ineffective, and frankly, as a laughingstock. And, as a result, he is moving in, he is invading his neighbors – like Ukraine – he’s kidnapping Estonians, and he’s moving into Syria to gain a stronger foothold in the Middle East."
*********************************************************************************************
Ted Cruz:
“We need a coherent plan to address both the specific crisis in Syria and the challenge posed more broadly by Putin’s resurgent Russia.
The good news is that America still has options — if our leaders can summon the will to exercise them.
For starters, in Syria we can’t double down on the failed strategies that have given Putin his opportunity to intervene.
We are now two years out from President Obama’s proposed intervention after al-Assad used chemical weapons against his own people. ...”
http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/09/opinions/cruz-syria-putin/index.html
________________________
CNN Editor’s Note (disclaimer):
“Ted Cruz is a U.S. senator from Texas. He is seeking the 2016 Republican presidential nomination. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.”
*******************************************************************
"According to the Washington Free Beacon, Russia’s nuclear arsenal how has over 100 nuclear warheads above the limit set by the treaty.
Since the treaty was launched, Russia has deployed 111 new nuclear warheads, bringing its total number of deployed warheads to 1,648. That treaty limit is 1,550 warheads — a number that must be reached in 2018.
Comparatively, the numbers of U.S. nuclear warheads, missiles and bombers have fallen dramatically and are already below the limits set by the treaty. Additionally, the United States has decreased the number of warheads in its deployed nuclear arsenal by 250.
While the United States intends to eliminate heavy bombers and launchers, Russia has launched a strategic nuclear force expansion.
Russian President Vladimir Putin also recently announced a new doctrine that placed priority on nuclear forces.
If this raises concern for you, you are not alone.
Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Ala., chairman of the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Strategic Forces, said Russia “is in the business of violating treaties.”
Rogers said Putin has violated several agreements and treaties in the past, and he simply “violates any treaty or agreement that puts limits on capabilities that Mr. Putin and his cronies desire.”
“Russia’s arguable adherence to the New START Treaty just indicates how bad a deal it is for the United States,” he said.
Adm. William Gortney, commander of the U.S. Northern Command, said Wednesday that Russia has read our play book and is “fielding cruise missiles that are very, very accurate, very long range.”
Gortney said these missiles have the ability to reach targets in Canada and the United States. He added that Russia has been participating in war game scenarios recently that simulate cruise missile strikes in Alaska.
This news is serious because it appears Russia has no intention of abiding by New START or any other treaty. We should therefore be building up our military and our arsenals instead of depleting them.
===============================================================
From the FreeBeacon:
Russia Adds 111 Warheads Under Arms Treaty
Moscow warheads above New START treaty limit
By: Bill Gertz
October 9, 2015
Russia has now deployed more than 100 nuclear warheads in its strategic arsenal above the limits set by the New START arms treaty limits—two years before it must meet treaty arms reduction goals.
"New START nuclear warhead and delivery system numbers made public Oct. 1 reveal that since the 2010 arms accord went into force, Moscow increased the number of deployed nuclear warheads by a total of 111 weapons for a total of 1,648 deployed warheads. That number is 98 warheads above the treaty limit of 1,550 warheads that must be reached by the 2018 deadline of the treaty.
At the same time, U.S. nuclear warheads, missiles, and bombers have fallen sharply and remain below the required levels under the New START pact.
The United States during the same period of the Russian increases cut its deployed nuclear arsenal by 250 warheads. ..." (more...)
http://freebeacon.com/national-security/russia-adds-111-warheads-under-arms-treaty/
************************************************
The New START Treaty: Central Limits and Key Provisions
Congressional Research Service
Summary
The United States and Russia signed the New START Treaty on April 8, 2010. After more than 20 hearings, the U.S. Senate gave its advice and consent to ratification on December 22, 2010, by a vote of 71-26. Both houses of the Russian parliament—the Duma and Federation Council— approved the treaty in late January 2011, and it entered into force on February 5, 2011, after Secretary of State Clinton and Foreign Minister Lavrov exchanged the instruments of ratification.
New START provides the parties with 7 years to reduce their forces, and will remain in force for a total of 10 years. It limits each side to no more than 800 deployed and nondeployed land-based intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) and submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM) launchers and deployed and nondeployed heavy bombers equipped to carry nuclear armaments.
Within that total, each side can retain no more than 700 deployed ICBMs, deployed SLBMs, and deployed heavy bombers equipped to carry nuclear armaments. The treaty also limits each side to no more than 1,550 deployed warheads; those are the actual number of warheads on deployed ICBMs and SLBMs, and one warhead for each deployed heavy bomber.
New START contains detailed definitions and counting rules that will help the parties calculate the number of warheads that count under the treaty limits. Moreover, the delivery vehicles and their warheads will count under the treaty limits until they are converted or eliminated according to the provisions described in the treaty’s Protocol. These provisions are far less demanding than those in the original START Treaty and will provide the United States and Russia with far more flexibility in determining how to reduce their forces to meet the treaty limits. ..."
New START Treaty: PDF:
http://fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/R41219.pdf
Russia will grow wealthier, more powerful, more aggressive in their overall expansionist agenda (Eastern Europe, eventually elsewhere), and much more of a threat to the US and its allies throughout the region and the world.
Sure it’s great IF they actually do get rid of ISIS (we shall see). But having a country like Russia step in and gain such huge strategic advantage over the US and its allies is nothing we should be cheering about.
If Obama was serious about wanting to take out ISIS, which I don’t believe he ever was—I think him and Putin are actually in cahoots on this whole thing despite his and Kerry’s public moans and groans about it, it might not ever have come to this. But then Russia would likely have come up with some other rationale or excuse for moving into Syria and taking control of it, and ultimately the entire Middle East. Makes me wonder if ISIS was a KGB-like invention of the Russians, created to give them cover for expanding.
Putin has stated that he believes the demise of the (mass-murdering, communist [my words]) Soviet Union was the "worst geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th century". He has also said he thinks Stalin deserves to have statues in his honor. He clearly seeks to restore the old Soviet Union, or something not too far different from it.
"a recent investigation conducted by Novaya Gazeta, one of the few independent newspapers left in Russia, complicates this cozy tale of counterterrorist cooperation. Based on extensive fieldwork in one village in the North Caucasus, reporter Elena Milashina has concluded that the “Russian special services have controlled” the flow of jihadists into Syria, where they have lately joined up not only with ISIS but other radical Islamist factions.
In other words, Russian officials are adding to the ranks of terrorists which the Russian government has deemed a collective threat to the security and longevity of its dictatorial ally on the Mediterranean, Bashar al-Assad."
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/08/23/russia-s-playing-a-double-game-with-islamic-terror0.html
____________________________________________________
Understanding Provocation [Provokatsiya]
One of the most powerful tools the Kremlin has in its secret arsenal of Special War is provocation, what they call provokatsiya.
While Moscow cannot claim to have invented this technique, which has existed as long as there have been secret services, there’s no doubt that Russians have perfected the art and taken it to a whole new level of sophistication and deviousness. At times, it can become a strategy all on its own (not always, mind you, with edifying results).
Provokatsiya simply means taking control of your enemies in secret and encouraging them to do things that discredit them and help you. You plant your own agents provocateurs and flip legitimate activists [in this case, dupe actual Jihadis -ETL], turning them to your side.
When you’re dealing with extremists to start with, getting them to do crazy, self-defeating things isn’t often difficult. In some cases, you simply create extremists and terrorists where they don’t exist. This is causing problems in order to solve them, and since the Tsarist period, Russian intelligence has been known to do just that.
While this isn’t a particularly nice technique, it works surprisingly well, particularly if you don’t care about bloody and messy consequences. ..."
http://20committee.com/2014/03/29/understanding-provocation/
_________________________________
In other words, it's like starting a fire, or pouring gasoline on a fire, in order to be the 'big hero', being first on the scene to put it out. Except in this case, you get to grab control over the buildings and town you helped 'saved' from the fire you helped to start.
Putin is running circles around Obama.
We have known from the start that al Qaida was the basis for the “ rebels” that we were supporting.
It’s wrong to use Obama’s PRO-Islamist policies as evidence that the entire US supports arming Islamonazis. Most of the public is dumb on this matter and kept in the dark.
Hillary acknowledged this week that we were arming the revolutionaries/seditionists in Libya.
Vlad for President 2016! Sure he is a corrupt despot. At least he is a leader.
by Jacob Kornbluh
Sept 2, 2015
In a phone interview with CNN Tuesday evening, Trump claimed that there’s “something in the Iran deal” that “people don’t understand” saying if someone attacks Iran, “we have to come to their defense.”
“Does that include Israel?” Trump asked. “And most people say yes, they don’t have an exclusion for Israel. So if Israel attacks Iran, according to that deal, I believe, the way it reads, unless they have a codicil or they have something to it, that we have to fight with Iran against Israel.” ..."
Trump was most probably referring to language highlighted by the opponents of the deal. On page 142, the deal includes a clause that states, “Co-operation through training and workshops to strengthen Iran’s ability to protect against, and respond to nuclear security threats, including sabotage, as well as to enable effective and sustainable nuclear security and physical protection systems.”
Washington-based Center for Security Policy asserted that Annex III appears “to commit the United States and other world powers to the defense of Iran’s nuclear program.”
http://jpupdates.com/2015/09/02/trump-iran-deal-requires-u-s-protecting-iran-in-event-of-israeli-strike/
_________________________________________________
Aug 2015...
__________________________________________________________
September 11, 2015
Jennifer Griffin, Lucas Tomlinson
FoxNews.com
As the Pentagon warily eyes a Russian military build-up in Syria, Western intelligence sources tell Fox News that the escalated Russian presence began just days after a secret Moscow meeting in late July between Iran’s Quds Force commander — their chief exporter of terror — and Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Fox News has learned Quds head Qassem Soleimani and Putin discussed such a joint military plan for Syria at that meeting, an encounter first reported by Fox News in early August. ...”
The Quds Force is the international arm of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard, involved in exporting terrorism to Iran’s proxies throughout the Middle East including Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Yemen. ...”
Officials who have monitored the build-up say they’ve seen more than 1,000 Russian combatants — some of them from the same plainclothes Special Forces units who were sent to Crimea and Ukraine. Some of these Russian troops are logistical specialists and needed for security at the expanding Russian bases.
************************************************************
Pro-Hezbollah Paper: Russia, Iran, Syria, Hezbollah Form Alliance
Sept 23, 2015
A prominent pro-Hezbollah newspaper in Lebanon reported Tuesday that Russia and the terrorist organization have formed an alliance and will fight together in Syria. “The parties to the alliance are the states of Russia, Iran, Syria, and Iraq, with Lebanon’s Hezbollah as the fifth party,”
Al-Akhbar Editor in Chief Ibrahim al-Amin wrote. The pact would be called the “4+1 alliance”—a pun based on the P5+1 that negotiated the nuclear deal with Iran. Hezbollah is a proxy of Iran based in Lebanon and Moscow has been working with Tehran to save Bashar al-Assad’s regime, even sending men and weapons to Syria.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2015/09/22/report-russia-partners-with-hezbollah.html
Any questions?
Are you a man or a woman?
Seriously.
Yes, Obama has made a mess of things and is playing a double game. But if Putin wants to use the term “terrorists” to mean “armed combatants”, he needs to be consistent. Terrorists use dramatic attacks against (mostly) civilian targets to undermine regimes, force their agenda onto the front burner, and gain political objectives when they conventional military options. ISIS burns people in cages, kidnaps girls for mass rape, destroys ancient monuments, etc. to get media attention to sow terror to get their way. ISIS operates as terrorists, even in military strength, yet Putin’s focus is not on ISIS.
Why are irregular forces fighting Assad’s army on the battlefield “terrorists”, if Putin’s proxy forces in Ukraine are not? How about Putin’s forces fighting in Syria — how are they different from the anti-Assad elements? Are Assad’s own forces “terrorists” when they use poisoned gas or bomb and shell cities, but not when they fight the rebels on the battlefield? Enough BS.
Putin & Lavrov v Obama & Kerry
Marxists v neo-marxists (who need training wheels and helmets to prevent bike accidents)